robdyck

Kohler - Vault K-3822 is similar except it has a drain rack.

Has anyone else noticed the 'Save As' function not working correctly? Or is my understanding of it incorrect? A couple of times recently, I have needed to propose an alternate layout. I press 'Save as' , then rename the file, and then proceed with adjustments to the new renamed file. Then when looking at the original file, I see that changes made in between the times of the last 'Save' and the 'Save As' have not been saved in the original plan file. I'd appreciate others input / experience before I contact support.

@JFH-DFH I'd suggest making a cad block of that image, then doing this process on a CAD detail taken from the elevation drawing. Then, you'll have simpler snap points and you can copy/paste back and forth between the cad detail and elevation camera as you see fit. I do this all the time with glass railings, so you can see behind them in elevation view.

For me, hitting those lines is usually quite trouble-free, but I'll certainly give that a try. Thanks for the suggestion.

You can also use a CAD detail where you copy/paste texture or material images.

That was me and I did that with the hopes that it would aid anyone else dealing with the same problem. I don't actually think it's a solution. If I try to snap a dimension to the edge of a polyline, I think it should be pretty simple, and it should hit the edge, not a corner. But we play the hand we're dealt.

Is it my imagination or has this slowly deprecated? I have found that it works a bit better by aiming for the opposite, or far corner of a polyline. As long as you don't care about extension gaps.

Mmmm, I've never experienced that. I draw plenty of vaulted ceiling planes over decks, and usually at 1/2 the pitch of the roof. The gable end wall (if there is one) almost always needs to be manually adjusted in section / elevation view.

I have not created a new template. But I have gotten the same crashes when using Chief's Residential Template.

Similar issue trying to dimension to a footing. dimension footing issue.mp4

Does anyone else find it very difficult to pickup CAD objects in Section View? For the sake of simplicity, I do use some CAD items in section view. But in X13, I find it very difficult to get a dimension to grab those items. I use a dimension with Locate Settings: End To End and CAD objects are all checked except for Text. I'd be interested to know if other users have similar issues. In the snippet, I have 3 CAD items that the dimension line should pickup, 2 polylines and 1 cad insulation box. The dimension simply will not pick them up. It works slightly better if I Uncheck Lines / Sides (see video). That's backwards, no? dimension cad issue.mp4

With the file open, go to File / Manage Auto-archives. You can select all the arrows from an archived plan, and copy-paste-in-place into the current plan file. To select all arrows, select one, then use the Match Properties tool to select the rest.

For me, Chief now crashes regularly using section / elevation views with Vector technique. Is the only solution to spend another 5K on a different PC?

Does anyone else find that: Automatic Balloon Framing doesn't seem to work correctly (messes up the cladding) Hang Floor Platform Above on Wall doesn't seem to work correctly (messes up the cladding) Horizontal Frame Through doesn't seem to work correctly (or at all) It would be great if we then didn't need to go outside and start filling in pieces of exterior cladding. #1 & #2 create cladding issues on the exterior, when one would assume they are supposed to affect the Structure"! It seems that we get to pick between manually editing framing, or patching exterior materials. So, for framed walls, we can use Chief's tools, then check "Retain Wall Framing" and then undo the use of Chief's tools. Handy.

I said it was silly! And yup, you'd also want to include the area column!

One silly way, would be to create a floor finish material named "Conditioned" and one named "Unconditioned". You could create a room finish schedule including just that column.

I call dibs on the 7th and the 9th floor.

@GeneDavis is gonna nail down that contract, hire all of us, and we'll have a nice little Florida Vacay! Lots of bar meetings will be required!

It doesn't work because of inaccuracies in your roof planes. The roofs are not centered correctly / don't have matching elevations. I've fixed that for you. 236429222_abdoexisting.plan

That's ridiculous. I can easily do it for 1.3M. Including travel.

Yup and while I didn't clarify it specifically, I was referring to that one file. Interestingly enough, I have cases where the wall on one side of symmetrical vaulted ceilings frames to my expectation while the wall on the other side extends upwards. So it's a bit weird to understand, but at least now I know that adjusting the roof structure thickness can make a difference.

Yes, it's because the roof structure depth is equal to or greater than the heel height (the difference between top of plate and baseline). In my original example, my roof structure thickness was 3.5".

FWIW, this appears to make no difference to the wall framing. Rather, it is the roof settings that control the plate height, not the ceiling plane. I figured out what I need to do differently. I need the roof structure depth to be equal to the vertical depth of the truss top chord, plus the depth of the truss bottom chord (for a flat ceiling). This setting then generates the plates at the correct height. This would be a hassle when using multiple roof pitches on different levels because that depth then needs to be customized for each roof plane. Because a typical residential roof truss has the top chord pivoting on the bottom chord (regional practice), one can use a Raise Off Plate value of 3 1/2" and then every roof plane will be set at the correct height, regardless of pitch. In this case, I have a 6:12 pitch so by adjusting the structure depth to 7 7/16", the plates generate correctly. Where it gets odd is that in my original examples, the plates are about 1" below the roof framing, even though the roof structure was set to 3.5". Now that I've figured this out, I will leave my default roof structure at 3.5" and adjust individual roof planes when needed as it will be quicker than manually editing wall details.

I appreciate the feedback Michael. This is essentially what I've done. For context, and for others reading this post, I would only do this where I'm creating detailed plans including high-quality renderings. Otherwise, the time involved would be somewhat wasted, unless one uses the same symbols repeatedly.

If I draw a new, matching roof plane in the same location (while keeping the existing roof plane, then Chief drops the plates back to the correct height. But, if I replace the initial roof plane with that new roof plane, the plates bump back up.